Originally Posted by Austin 3:!6
This presumption that cricket is heavily tilted towards batsman is a myth. On the contrary I think cricket is all but a bowlers game. You get only one chance as a batsman, one error...one small nick or an umpire blunder and you are out for the entire match. Bowlers can get hit for boundaries after boundaries and still get 60 chances (60 balls) in an ODI game to make a comeback. Hence ICC ensuring flat pitches/heavy bats to keep batters in a game heavily tilted towards bowlers.

You want bat/ball balance? Ok how about this? Every batsman should get 3 chances before they can be ruled out for the entire match. Similarly, a bowler get hit for 10 boundaries cant bowl anymore in the match. Now that is called balancing the game.

OPs suggestion of bat/ball balance by allowing bowlers to bowl non-stop but batsmen should get only one chance is hilarious.

In the same token, you need to produce few chances as a bowler to get the batsman out

As a batsman facing error? How about a bowler who faces them

Bowlers can get hit boundary street Boundaries? No bowler would take the figures of 1/90 - 10 after the game

Games where scores are 350 means bowlers have very little to do with outcome of the game, it's who's batsmen are superior that will win the game, a balance would be where either a bowler or batsman could win the game, how you go into a game, expecting a century to win the game